DOCSLIB.ORG

Illinois Classical Studies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Illinois Classical Studies 18 npoq Tov eiTiovxa—Sources and Credibility of De Stoicorum Repugnantiis 8 JOHN GLUCKER How does one ascertain that a saying ascribed to Zeno of Citium represents a genuine philosophical view of the founder of Stoicism? This is no idle question. By the time of Diogenes Laertius at the latest, most people seem no longer to have read the works of the early Stoics. Having completed the biographical section in his Life of Zeno (VII. 1-38), Diogenes proceeds to offer us, not a summary of Zeno's own philosophy, but a Stoic Koivf|. His excuse for this (VII. 38)—8ia to xotixov KxtatTiv yeveoGai if\c, aipeoecoq— is feeble. The Stoics were no Epicureans or Pythagoreans, claiming to carry on and disseminate the "true doctrines" discovered once for all by a divine founder: even Diogenes' own doxography enters, from time to time, into details about disagreements and disputes among the various Stoics. Plato was also the founder of a "school of thought." This does not prevent Diogenes from presenting us with a long summary of Plato's own dpeoKovTa (III. 67-109). When Diogenes' source supplies an account of various dycoyaC within the same school, he has no hesitation in reproducing his source's doxography with all the shades of difference (III. 86-97). It is merely that by his time, very few people were likely to have read the hundreds of scrolls written by Zeno, Cleanthes, Chrysippus and their disciples and followers—or rather, those of them still readily available. Even by the time of Cicero, the ordinary educated man—even a writer on philosophical themes like Cicero himself—did not attempt to read the original works of the early Stoics, but used summaries and doxographies. What about Plutarch? It is not my intention here to deal, yet again, with the whole issue of Plutarch's familiarity with early Stoic sources. Much has been written on it, from many different angles, often in terms of such generalities and probabilities as "Plutarch, who read so much ..." or "Plutarch must have read his Zeno—he quotes him so often" (the examples are my invention, but they are not pure fiction). I have chosen to concentrate on one piece of Plutarchean evidence which, I believe, can be treated as a test case. Here, then, is the text of De Stoicorum Repugnantiis 8: 474 Illinois Classical Studies, XIII.2 Tlpbc, xov eijiovxa '\ir\8i SiKTiv 8iKdoTi(;, Ttplv a|a.(p(o |iv0ov aKovorii;' ocvTeX-eyev 6 Zt|V(dv xoio-uTtp tivl Xoyo) xp^nevoq 'en' ajceSei^ev 6 TtpoTEpoi; eiTicov, o\)K aKovoxeov xov 5EDTepo\) X.Eyovxo<; (jt£pa<; yap exEi x6 ^t|xov)hevov), eix' ouk citieSei^ev (o|xoiov y«P wq ei 5' HTi5' -OTcriKOVGE kA.ti0£1(; f\ wjcaKotioai; exepexioev). tixoi a.nibeiE,zv f\ ovk anibzi^tv o\)k ciKo-oaxEov apa xov bevxipov kiyovioq.' xovxov bk xov Xoyov tpanriaaq ailxoi; dvxEYpctcpE |iev npbq ir\v TlXa.-c(ovoc, IloA-ixEiav, eX-ve 5e oo(pio|j.axa, koi ttiv 6ia?L£KxiKTiv cbq xomo icoiEiv 5vva|ievTiv ekeXede Jiapa^auPdvEiv zoxiq |ia0Tixd(;. Kaixoi f\ ditfiSEi^E nX.dxcov ti q-uk drefiSEi^E xd ev 5' xfi IloA-ixEia, Kax' oidiztpov fiv dvayKaiov dvxiypdcpeiv dXA.d Jtdvxtoq icEpixxov Ktti ndxaiov. x6 5' awxo xai JtEpi xSv OCCpiOndxCOV EOXIV ElTtElV.' A genuine piece of evidence for an "eccentric" Zenonian doctrine? This is the way in which our passage has been regarded by numerous distinguished scholars in the last hundred years or so. A. C. Pearson includes two parts of this chapter, as Fragments 29 (the anecdote) and 6 {eXve—xox>q |j,a0T|X(X(;) of Zeno, in his Fragments ofZeno and Cleanthes?- On the anecdote, he comments: "The argument is couched in the syllogistic form which Zeno especially affected: see Introd. p. 33"^—where the specimens of syllogism he adduces are very different from the disjunctive argument in our passage. What matters, however, is that Pearson takes this chapter of Plutarch seriously as a piece of Zenonian doctrine. So does von Amim, who has the anecdote as SVF I. 78 (Zeno, Rhetorica), the sentence concerning Plato as I. 259 (Zeno, Ethica), and the sentence on sophisms as I. 50 (Zeno, Logica). Nicola Festa regards the anecdote as the only surviving fragment of Zeno's lost work "EXeyxoi 8tjo.'' Alfons Weische takes it to be an argument against Arcesilaus' practice in utramque partem dispuiandi} Both are quoted by the late Harold Cherniss in a note to his edition of the text—true, without comments, but with an obvious acceptance of our passage as genuine evidence for a Zenonian doctrine.* To crown it all, we have the clear statement of Professor Daniel Babut in his great work on Plutarch and the Stoics: ' Text: Pohlenz-Westman. I have omitted the apparatus, since there are no readings relevant to the argument. ^The Fragments of Zeno and Cleanlhes, with introduction and explanatory notes ... by A. C. Pearson . (London 1891) 80-81; 60-61. ^ Ibid. p. 60. ''Nicola Festa, I frammenti degli Sloici antichi, vol. I (Bari 1932) 1 15-16. ' Alfons Weische, Cicero unddie neue Akademie (Munster 1961) 77-78. * Plutarch's Moralia, vol. Xffl, part H, ed. by Harold Chemiss (Loeb Classical Library 1976) 429, note a. See his Introduction, 373-74. —. John Glucker 475 En revanche, De Stoic, rep. p. 1034 E (7) [misprint for 8-J. G.], de port^e beaucoup moins gSnerale, et oil Plutarque semble reproduire presque litt^ralment le raisonnement par lequel Z6non ddmontrait qu'il est inutile dans un proces—ou en debat philosophique—de preter I'oreille aux deux parties ou d'dcouter le point de vue de I'adversaire, doit etre consid6r6 comme une veritable citation, bien que Plutarque n'ait pas pris la peine ou n'ait pas pu indiquer de quel livre elle provenait, et bien qu'U ne pr^tende pas la reproduire mot a mot7 Doit etre considere comme une veritable citation. After all this, one finds it surprising that this piece of "Zenonian doctrine" has not yet found its way into the standard histories of Greek Philosophy or of the Stoa.* But hold. If the argument in our anecdote were to be regarded as representing a genuine philosophical position of Zeno, it would land him, not merely in the contradictions indicated by Plutarch. It would also imply a wholesale rejection of the task of dialectic as described by Zeno himself in SVF I. 48^9—both independent of Plutarch. It would also imply that such Chrysippean fragments as SVF II. 127-29 (all taken from Ch. 10 of Stoic. Rep.) constitute a complete departure from a doctrine of the founder of the school and a total rejection of that doctrine. Let us now consider the form of the anecdote in our chapter. It is a story about Zeno answering with a counter-argument (dvTeA.e7ev), a literary quotation. Whether the hexametric line [iTiSe Siktiv SiKdo-jiq kxX. is Pseudo-PhocyUdes' or Hesiod,^'' it is not very likely that the ancient poet would have been introduced by Zeno as 6 eiticov, and that Zeno would quote him simply to contradict him. Zeno is not Socrates of the "aporetic dialogues." When Zeno wishes to quote poetry—even to alter its order or its sense—other expressions are used: owExe(; te npoEcpEpETo . zohc, . Ex)pi7ii6o\) oziyip-oc,(jyL VII. 22); lovc, 0* 'HoioSo-o ot{%o-0(; ^ExaypdepEiv ouTco (ib. 25); (pTjol to ek tfi^ Ni6pri<;(ib. 28). No. It is far more likely that what we have here is not a quotation from one of Zeno's own works, in which the ancient hexameter is brought in only to be confuted, but an anecdote about Zeno. Someone, on some occasion, quoted this line of poetry against Zeno. Zeno countered him with his disjunctive argument showing, by the way, in the very act of refuting him that he had listened to the other side: but on this later. What we have here looks far more like the sort of literary anecdote called by ancient rhetoricians xpdcu. A number of rhetorical manuals from ' Daniel Babul, Plutarque et le Sloicisme (Paris 1969) 222-23. 'I find no mention of it, for example, in any edition of Zeller, Ueberweg-Praechter, or Pohlenz. ' Diehl, Anlh. Lyr? 2, p. 98, v. 87—cited in double square brackets. See his apparatus of testimonia to this line. "'Fr.338Merkelbach-WesL — 476 lUinois Classical Studies, XIII.2 late antiquity deal at some length with xpeia as a rhetorical device.'^ Their treatment of this sub-literary form is almost entirely the same, with many sentences and passages repeated virtually word for word (except for the more lengthy discussion of Theon, which is probably his own extension of what he had found in his source). The question of their common source (Hermogenes?) should be investigated elsewhere.'^ For our purpose, it would be enough to quote at random a definition of xpeia offered by one of these late rhetoricians: Xpeia eaxi Xoyoc, fi Ttpa^i; evaxoxoq koV ovvto^o^, t'iq xi jtpoacoicov dopion-cvov e'xoDoa xtjv ava<popdv, Jtpoi; eitavopGwciv xivo(; xcov Ev xo) Pico jtapaXa|xPavonevTi." It may also be of some use for our passage of Plutarch to note that one of these rhetoricians realized that not each and every xpeia has to be serious and to contain a moral: eoxi bk xapiev-ci^eoBai ttiv xpeiav evtoxe \n\5kv E%ovoav PiKxpeXeq.^'' For the rest—as one could expect from handbooks of rhetoric for the instruction of beginners—TtpoyuM-vdoiiaTa much of their discussion is devoted to such exercises as turning a xpe^a from one grammatical case to another; and their standard division of xpeicci is into XoyiKaC, jipaKxiKai, (iiKiaC—a "literary," rather than a "philological" classification.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Teachers' Pay in Ancient Greece
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Papers from the University Studies series (The University of Nebraska) University Studies of the University of Nebraska 5-1942 Teachers' Pay In Ancient Greece Clarence A. Forbes Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/univstudiespapers Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University Studies of the University of Nebraska at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Papers from the University Studies series (The University of Nebraska) by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Teachers' Pay In Ancient Greece * * * * * CLARENCE A. FORBES UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA STUDIES Ma y 1942 STUDIES IN THE HUMANITIES NO.2 Note to Cataloger UNDER a new plan the volume number as well as the copy number of the University of Nebraska Studies was discontinued and only the numbering of the subseries carried on, distinguished by the month and the year of pu blica tion. Thus the present paper continues the subseries "Studies in the Humanities" begun with "University of Nebraska Studies, Volume 41, Number 2, August 1941." The other subseries of the University of Nebraska Studies, "Studies in Science and Technology," and "Studies in Social Science," are continued according to the above plan. Publications in all three subseries will be supplied to recipients of the "University Studies" series. Corre­ spondence and orders should be addressed to the Uni­ versity Editor, University of Nebraska, Lincoln. University of Nebraska Studies May 1942 TEACHERS' PAY IN ANCIENT GREECE * * * CLARENCE A.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Cynicism
    A HISTORY OF CYNICISM Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com A HISTORY OF CYNICISM From Diogenes to the 6th Century A.D. by DONALD R. DUDLEY F,llow of St. John's College, Cambrid1e Htmy Fellow at Yale University firl mll METHUEN & CO. LTD. LONDON 36 Essex Street, Strand, W.C.2 Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com First published in 1937 PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com PREFACE THE research of which this book is the outcome was mainly carried out at St. John's College, Cambridge, Yale University, and Edinburgh University. In the help so generously given to my work I have been no less fortunate than in the scenes in which it was pursued. I am much indebted for criticism and advice to Professor M. Rostovtseff and Professor E. R. Goodonough of Yale, to Professor A. E. Taylor of Edinburgh, to Professor F. M. Cornford of Cambridge, to Professor J. L. Stocks of Liverpool, and to Dr. W. H. Semple of Reading. I should also like to thank the electors of the Henry Fund for enabling me to visit the United States, and the College Council of St. John's for electing me to a Research Fellowship. Finally, to• the unfailing interest, advice and encouragement of Mr. M. P. Charlesworth of St. John's I owe an especial debt which I can hardly hope to repay. These acknowledgements do not exhaust the list of my obligations ; but I hope that other kindnesses have been acknowledged either in the text or privately.
    [Show full text]
  • The Protrepticus of Clement of Alexandria: a Commentary
    Miguel Herrero de Jáuregui THE PROTREPTICUS OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA: A COMMENTARY to; ga;r yeu'do" ouj yilh'/ th'/ paraqevsei tajlhqou'" diaskedavnnutai, th'/ de; crhvsei th'" ajlhqeiva" ejkbiazovmenon fugadeuvetai. La falsedad no se dispersa por la simple comparación con la verdad, sino que la práctica de la verdad la fuerza a huir. Protréptico 8.77.3 PREFACIO Una tesis doctoral debe tratar de contribuir al avance del conocimiento humano en su disciplina, y la pretensión de que este comentario al Protréptico tenga la máxima utilidad posible me obliga a escribirla en inglés porque es la única lengua que hoy casi todos los interesados pueden leer. Pero no deja de ser extraño que en la casa de Nebrija se deje de lado la lengua castellana. La deuda que contraigo ahora con el español sólo se paliará si en el futuro puedo, en compensación, “dar a los hombres de mi lengua obras en que mejor puedan emplear su ocio”. Empiezo ahora a saldarla, empleándola para estos agradecimientos, breves en extensión pero no en sinceridad. Mi gratitud va, en primer lugar, al Cardenal Don Gil Álvarez de Albornoz, fundador del Real Colegio de España, a cuya generosidad y previsión debo dos años provechosos y felices en Bolonia. Al Rector, José Guillermo García-Valdecasas, que administra la herencia de Albornoz con ejemplar dedicación, eficacia y amor a la casa. A todas las personas que trabajan en el Colegio y hacen que cumpla con creces los objetivos para los que se fundó. Y a mis compañeros bolonios durante estos dos años. Ha sido un honor muy grato disfrutar con todos ellos de la herencia albornociana.
    [Show full text]
  • Citations in Classics and Ancient History
    Citations in Classics and Ancient History The most common style in use in the field of Classical Studies is the author-date style, also known as Chicago 2, but MLA is also quite common and perfectly acceptable. Quick guides for each of MLA and Chicago 2 are readily available as PDF downloads. The Chicago Manual of Style Online offers a guide on their web-page: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html The Modern Language Association (MLA) does not, but many educational institutions post an MLA guide for free access. While a specific citation style should be followed carefully, none take into account the specific practices of Classical Studies. They are all (Chicago, MLA and others) perfectly suitable for citing most resources, but should not be followed for citing ancient Greek and Latin primary source material, including primary sources in translation. Citing Primary Sources: Every ancient text has its own unique system for locating content by numbers. For example, Homer's Iliad is divided into 24 Books (what we might now call chapters) and the lines of each Book are numbered from line 1. Herodotus' Histories is divided into nine Books and each of these Books is divided into Chapters and each chapter into line numbers. The purpose of such a system is that the Iliad, or any primary source, can be cited in any language and from any publication and always refer to the same passage. That is why we do not cite Herodotus page 66. Page 66 in what publication, in what edition? Very early in your textbook, Apodexis Historia, a passage from Herodotus is reproduced.
    [Show full text]
  • THE PHILOSOPHY BOOK George Santayana (1863-1952)
    Georg Hegel (1770-1831) ................................ 30 Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) ................. 32 Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach (1804-1872) ...... 32 John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) .......................... 33 Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) ..................... 33 Karl Marx (1818-1883).................................... 34 Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) ................ 35 Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914).............. 35 William James (1842-1910) ............................ 36 The Modern World 1900-1950 ............................. 36 Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) .................... 37 Ahad Ha'am (1856-1927) ............................... 38 Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) ............. 38 Edmund Husserl (1859–1938) ....................... 39 Henri Bergson (1859-1941) ............................ 39 Contents John Dewey (1859–1952) ............................... 39 Introduction....................................................... 1 THE PHILOSOPHY BOOK George Santayana (1863-1952) ..................... 40 The Ancient World 700 BCE-250 CE..................... 3 Miguel de Unamuno (1864-1936) ................... 40 Introduction Thales of Miletus (c.624-546 BCE)................... 3 William Du Bois (1868-1963) .......................... 41 Laozi (c.6th century BCE) ................................. 4 Philosophy is not just the preserve of brilliant Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) ........................ 41 Pythagoras (c.570-495 BCE) ............................ 4 but eccentric thinkers that it is popularly Max Scheler
    [Show full text]
  • Plato's Euthydemus
    PLATO’S EUTHYDEMUS: A STUDY ON THE RELATIONS BETWEEN LOGIC AND EDUCATION Plato’s Euthydemus is an unlucky dialogue. Few dealt with it in its own right, not just as part of a wider discussion of Plato, and fewer still saw in it more than a topic of sophistic fallacies. Some, of course, paid attention to the constructive sections of the dialogue, but only rarely do we come across a real attempt to unify its different aspects.1 In this paper I propose to show how, in the Euthydemus, Plato tries to distinguish between the Socratic and the Sophistic conceptions of education, by tracing them to their roots in the opposing views of the Sophists — and especially those of the second generation — and of Socrates about truth and about the role of logic. And although the eristic techniques of Euthydemus and Dionysodorus are obviously fallacious, they turn out to be developments of Protagoras’ views and follow from philosophical positions worthy of serious examination. The Euthydemus is a caricature, to be sure. But, as all good caricature, it has a serious intent. It sketches the degeneration of the Sophistic approach to education, in some of its aspects. More important­ ly, it distinguishes Socratic education from the methods and effects of its Sophistic counterpart. Euthydemus and Dionysodorus, the two sophist brothers, are reminis­ cent of the great Sophists of the Protagoras in more than one way. They are polymaths like Hippias, and at one time or another have taught a variety of arts, from forensic rhetoric to armed combat. Also, they have Prodicus’ penchant for linguistic analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Birth of Rhetoric: Gorgias, Plato and Their Successors
    THE BIRTH OF RHETORIC ISSUES IN ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY General editor: Malcolm Schofield GOD IN GREEK PHILOSOPHY Studies in the early history of natural theology L.P.Gerson ANCIENT CONCEPTS OF PHILOSOPHY William Jordan LANGUAGE, THOUGHT AND FALSEHOOD IN ANCIENT GREEK PHILOSOPHY Nicholas Denyer MENTAL CONFLICT Anthony Price THE BIRTH OF RHETORIC Gorgias, Plato and their successors Robert Wardy London and New York First published 1996 by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.” Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001 First published in paperback 1998 © 1996 Robert Wardy All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data Wardy, Robert. The birth of rhetoric: Gorgias, Plato, and their successors/ Robert Wardy. p. cm.—(Issues in ancient philsophy) Includes bibliographical rerferences (p. ) and index. 1. Plato. Gorgias. 2. Rhetoric, Ancient.
    [Show full text]
  • DIOGENES of SINOPE Diogenes of Sinope (C
    DIOGENES OF SINOPE Diogenes of Sinope (c. 412‐323 BC), a contemporary of Plato and Aristotle, is considered the founder of the philosophical school of Cynicism. Concerned more with action than with words, he left no writings. What we know of his thought is what has been related to us by contempo‐ raries and later scholars. The most extensive account is from Diogenes Laertes, writing almost 500 years after Diogenes lived. LIFE OF DIOGENES OF SINOPE, THE CYNIC (404‐323 BC) RD BY DIOGENES LAERTIUS (3 CENTURY AD) Diogenes was a native of Sinope, son of Hicesius, a banker. Diocles relates that he went into exile because his father was entrusted with the money of the state and adulterated the coin‐ age. But Eubulides in his book on Diogenes says that Diogenes himself did this and was forced to leave home along with his father. Moreover Diogenes himself actually confesses in his Porde‐ lus that he adulterated the coinage. Some say that having been appointed to superintend the workmen he was persuaded by them, and that he went to Delphi or to the Delian oracle in his own city and inquired of Apollo whether he should do what he was urged to do. When the god gave him permission to alter the political currency, not understanding what this meant, he adulterated the state coinage, and when he was detected, according to some he was banished, while according to others he voluntarily quitted the city for fear of consequences. One version is that his father entrusted him with the money and that he debased it, in consequence of which the father was imprisoned and died, while the son fled, came to Delphi, and inquired, not whether he should falsify the coinage, but what he should do to gain the greatest reputation; and that then it was that he received the oracle.
    [Show full text]
  • A Political Interpretation of Plato's Protagoras and Gorgias
    THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA Self-Deception and the City: A Political Interpretation of Plato’s Protagoras and Gorgias A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Philosophy Of The Catholic University of America In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Mary Elizabeth Halper Washington, D.C. 2019 Self-Deception and the City: A Political Interpretation of Plato’s Protagoras and Gorgias Mary Elizabeth Halper, Ph.D. Director: V. Bradley Lewis, Ph.D. Sophistry and rhetoric possess the disturbing power to appear to be precisely what they under- mine. Sophistry passes itself off as education even as it subverts genuine ethical and intellectual formation; rhetoric looks like a particularly compelling form of communication even as it sub- verts the possibility of seeking truth in speech. This dissertation begins with the claim that Plato wrote his Protagoras and Gorgias to treat of this disturbing power and its political consequences. I argue that the Protagoras and the Gorgias, as representative treatments of sophistry and rhetoric, should be read together in order to gain insight into the genuine art of politics, of which sophistry and rhetoric together form a subversive imitation. First I undertake an exegesis of the Protagoras and the Gorgias, both as individual dialogues and as a composite whole. Then I present systematic and philosophical arguments to support my central thesis, which emerges from my interpreta- tions and is supported by my thematic investigations. This thesis asserts that self-deception isan inherent feature of political communities, whereby political communities both must rely on the efficacy of appearance and cannot acknowledge this very reliance.
    [Show full text]
  • Punishments and the Conclusion of Herodotus' Histories
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by MURAL - Maynooth University Research Archive Library Punishments and the Conclusion of Herodotus’ Histories William Desmond NE MUST CONSIDER the end of every affair, how it will turn out.”1 Solon’s advice to Croesus has often been Oapplied to Herodotus’ Histories themselves: Is the con- clusion of Herodotus’ work a fitting and satisfying one? Older interpretations tended to criticize the final stories about Ar- tayctes and Artembares as anticlimactic or inappropriate: Did Herodotus forget himself here, or were the stories intended as interludes, preludes to further narrative?2 Entirely opposite is the praise accorded Herodotus in a recent commentary on Book 9: “The brilliance of Herodotus as a writer and thinker is mani- fest here, as the conclusion of the Histories both brings together those themes which have permeated the entire work and, at the same time, alludes to the new themes of the post-war world.” 3 More recent appreciation for Herodotus’ “brilliance,” then, is often inspired by the tightly-woven texture of Herodotus’ narrative. Touching upon passion, revenge, noble primitivism, 1 Hdt. 1.32: skop°ein d¢ xrØ pantÚw xrÆmatow tØn teleutÆn, kª épobÆsetai (text C. Hude, OCT). 2 For summaries of earlier assessments (Wilamowitz, Jacoby, Pohlenz, et al.) see H. R. Immerwahr, Form and Thought in Herodotus (Cleveland 1966) 146 n.19; D. Boedeker, “Protesilaos and the End of Herodotus’ Histories,” ClAnt 7 (1988) 30–48, at 30–31; C. Dewald, “Wanton Kings, Picked Heroes, and Gnomic Founding Fathers: Strategies of Meaning at the End of Herodotus’ Histories,” in D.
    [Show full text]
  • Thales of Miletus Sources and Interpretations Miletli Thales Kaynaklar Ve Yorumlar
    Thales of Miletus Sources and Interpretations Miletli Thales Kaynaklar ve Yorumlar David Pierce October , Matematics Department Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University Istanbul http://mat.msgsu.edu.tr/~dpierce/ Preface Here are notes of what I have been able to find or figure out about Thales of Miletus. They may be useful for anybody interested in Thales. They are not an essay, though they may lead to one. I focus mainly on the ancient sources that we have, and on the mathematics of Thales. I began this work in preparation to give one of several - minute talks at the Thales Meeting (Thales Buluşması) at the ruins of Miletus, now Milet, September , . The talks were in Turkish; the audience were from the general popu- lation. I chose for my title “Thales as the originator of the concept of proof” (Kanıt kavramının öncüsü olarak Thales). An English draft is in an appendix. The Thales Meeting was arranged by the Tourism Research Society (Turizm Araştırmaları Derneği, TURAD) and the office of the mayor of Didim. Part of Aydın province, the district of Didim encompasses the ancient cities of Priene and Miletus, along with the temple of Didyma. The temple was linked to Miletus, and Herodotus refers to it under the name of the family of priests, the Branchidae. I first visited Priene, Didyma, and Miletus in , when teaching at the Nesin Mathematics Village in Şirince, Selçuk, İzmir. The district of Selçuk contains also the ruins of Eph- esus, home town of Heraclitus. In , I drafted my Miletus talk in the Math Village. Since then, I have edited and added to these notes.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Vii., the Pythagoreans
    CHAPTER VII., THE PYTHAGOREANS 138. ThePythagoreanSchool 139. Philolaus 140. PlatoandthePythagoreans 141. The"FragmentsofPhilolaus" 142. TheProblem 143. AristotleontheNumbers 144. TheElementsofNumbers 145. TheNumbersSpatial 146. TheNumbersasMagnitudes 147. TheNumbersandtheElements 148. TheDodecahedron 149. TheSoula"Harmony" 150. TheCentralFire 151. TheAntichthon 152. TheHarmonyoftheSpheres 153. ThingsLikenessesof Numbers 138.ThePythagoreanSchool AFTER losing their supremacy in the Achaiancities, the Pythagoreans concentratedthemselves at Rhegion; but the school foundedthere did not maintainitself for long, andonly Archytas stayed behindinItaly. Philolaos andLysis, the latter of whom hadescapedas a young manfrom the massacre of Kroton, had already found their way to Thebes.1 We know from Plato that Philolaos was there towards the close of the fifthcentury, andLysis was afterwards the teacher of Epameinondas.2 Some of the Pythagoreans, however, were able to return to Italy later. Philolaos certainly did so, and Plato implies that he hadleft Thebes some time before 399 B.C., the year Sokrates was put todeath. Inthe fourthcentury, the chief seat of the school is the Doriancity of Taras, and we findthe Pythagoreans heading the opposition to Dionysios of Syracuse. It is to this period that the activity of Archytas belongs. He was the friendof Plato, andalmost realisedthe ideal of the philosopher king. He ruled Taras for years, andAristoxenos tells us that he was never defeatedinthe fieldof battle.3 He was also the inventor of mathematical mechanics. At the same time, Pythagoreanism hadtaken root inthe East. Lysis remainedat Thebes, where Simmias andKebes hadheardPhilolaos, while the remnant of the 206 Pythagoreanschool of Rhegionsettledat Phleious. Aristoxenos was personally acquaintedwiththe last generation of this school, and mentioned by name Xenophilos the Chalkidian from Thrace, with Phanton, Echekrates, Diokles, and Polymnastos of Phleious.
    [Show full text]